Allah Is Great And Merciful...
just please find me a soft bed somewhere between D.C. , Manhattan and Chicago the commutes are taking their toll.
posted by Patrick J. Fitzgerald at 2/17/2006
Feb 17, 2006
About Me
- Name: Patrick J. Fitzgerald
- Location: U.S. Attorney On Assignment - WDC, Illinois, United States
Think Globally Prosecute Locally - I grew up in Flatbush, kept my nose clean, went to law school. Now that I am in Chicago and D.C. I have found that the rampant graft and corruption to be a travesty - a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham. ---Favorite quote --- "Conditional love is an oxymoron." - Yours truly
Previous Posts
- Live Long And Prosper...
- The Family Jewels...
- Out Of Touch...
- CSI Kenedy County Texas...
- Whittington Shooting Schmooting...
- More Cartoons & Buffoonery...
- Sympathy For The Devil..?
- Harry W. - Before And After...
- I Am Irish...
- Born Yesterday..?
43 Comments:
That would be Pittsburg or Columbus - you need an RV/Bus a la John Madden. Fitz's Mobile DOJ HQ -I like it!
Get a goose down blank or borrow one lay on top of it and you'll feel better. Now down to business. You have to stay focused and make sure you eat the right foods and not only that junk. Let your body tell you what to do not your brain. This weekend rent some funny movie/cartoons or watch the simpsons. Your stressed out and need to relax. THAT'S AN ORDER MISTER
Yes maam.
Now, I hope that you are certainly not thinking of knocking ANY prison sentences for Libby and the not yet charged Rove and Cheney even for good behavior!... You sound stressed to the max with the commutes. Try to relax! Your best bet for travel is a RV for the cities that you mention and a good driver. Call it a Fitzmobile.
Get sponsors like a NASCAR team. I would think TUMS, Pepto Bismo,Krispy Kreme and some bail bond companies would jump at the opportunity.
Excellent work!
Fitz, now is the time to bring Cheney down to a screeching halt....He's fumbling, the goal lines on the side are drawn, goalposts getting sidetracked!
Cheney fumbles the ball!!! Time for the opposition to steal it.
:)
-me
have a nice weekend
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Enjoy the Guinness.
It's good for you.
St. Brigid
So much more than a breakfast drink
Folks,
Have a wonderful and safe weekend and President's Day. I will leave you with this joke I heard on the radio today. A radio disc jockey asked a listener: " So, what do you think that President is going to do on President's Day?" And the listener responded: "He will be probably trying to figure out what President's Day is." Makes you wonder.
I love the idea of the Fitzmobile (with sponsors on the sides - those reflecting truth, justice and the American way, of course). You can sleep in the back and I'll drive hither and yon. Snow doesn't faze me! Might have to stop a few major league ballparks come summer, but you can sleep through that part if you want.
Up in Michigan
You are one hilarious woman!
Fitz,
I think Up in Michigan is applying for the job!
You prefer Allah to God? It figures.
Fitz:
I thought you were going to relax and watch movies/cartoons tonight? I see you posting on HuffPo on Alec's comment. And, I did too... lol
Thanks to the Drudge Report link to it, all the idiots are attacking Alec tonight.
Have a nice weekend and really try to rest dahling. You deserve it. :)
S-Q
Hey Anonymous,
You don't know shit you little closet Zion nazi....We have you pegged.
What was it....
By the way, Fitzgerald is catholic...as is all his leaders. They don't follow Allah, they follow Jesus Christ and the arab decorum rather than the bullshit Talmud which is Michael Chertoffs religion for Zionist Judaism incarnate.
We're all coming for you....and we drive the whole op now.
-me
It looks like Drudge's drool is leaking in! They read a headline and form an opinion. ;)
Fitz:
They are even coming over to Alec's website and making nasty remarks about Alec!
alecbaldwin.com
S-Q
Those damn neocon freaks need to learn to play nice, another one of their "contractors" was just arrested
Don't worry Fitz we got all of your backs....
Great job on the filing: 30 plus pages!!! Time for the Jury to go to town on the latest indictments....
:-D
Ho ho these neocons are pathetic....
"I worry that the request for the PDB's may be the kind of overreach that could sour the court on addressing more pertinent requests in the depth they deserve. As Judge Tatel's opinion [see discussion at paragraph #5] surely suggests, the Court itself seems to be the real wild card here. I'm not at all sure it helps to have a Judge start out assuming he's being greymailed. Do you have a sense of how successful such tactics have actually proved on appeal?"
So these idiots still haven't figured out, that the CIA assets were damaged and the court has ruled on its damages?
Therefore, Libby's obstruction is plain as day. Because the original leaker hasn't even been charged yet.
The only reason as far as I know, from attornies and from your law handbook Fitzgerald, that 793(c) can not be proven yet is because Goss is with-holding the leak damage report.
And there's still basis to prove it without it; if you go by the process of elimination and check Cheney's own written notes. This is a fishing hunt, by the poor disgraced neocons who still dont know the CIA is after 'em.......
>:-)
You bastards, and I know you are officially lurking here, are going to hell and are the devil's children
You bastard assyrian neocons, and you know who you are, did the unforgivable....you went on national television and blasted the bible and scriptures as "anti semitic"
Talmud claims the scriptures are anti-semitic, so the neocons do as well
I swear to you, that will be your downfall. We are united with god, and you are united with satan. This is the final war neocons, and you're now at check-mate.
Sleep tight.....we're coming to drag you and finish off "Talmud carrier" Dick Cheney once and for all.....
8-)
-The Double Dealer
America is awakening!!!
Click on my nickname to see the site!
ahhh, keep it up fruit loops
Ye treacherous Neocon carrion eating jackals, may dust be upon on thy heads and dung in thy mouths.
Peace will be victorius at the end!
Nexus,
That was an excellent, incomparable and commendable read, many sincere thanks.
No wonder Bush's budget includes a large amount of money going to Iraq than other issues here in the United States that are needed. Look how many money is lost in Iraq and look how much money is replaced by this loss:
Iraq oil sector lost over USD 6 bln. in 2005 -- official
PWR-IRAQ-OIL-LOSS Iraq oil sector lost over USD 6 bln. in 2005 -- official BAGHDAD, Feb 18 (KUNA) -- Iraq has lost over USD 6 billion throughout 2005 due to sabotage operations against its oil sector facilities, a senior official told KUNA on Saturday.Issam Jihad, Spokesman for the Iraqi Oil Ministry said the ministry experts have estimated the loss at USD 6.25 billion, while 138 security and technical personnel lost their lives in a series of 186 sabotage operations carried in 2005.Operations to set oil fields ablaze cost the ministry about USD 400 million, while above USD 2.7 billion were lost in operations against crude oil pipelines. Destroying petrochemicals pipelines also cost over USD 3 billion, he concluded. (end) mhg.
http://www.kuna.net.kw/Home/Story.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=830556
Very interesting strategy in which the little soldier, Irve, and his attorney are using. Here is Libby's strategy: Libby claimed that he can't remember and by requesting the specific documents from Fitz, Libby is trying to prove that he was so overworked from his job that he couldn't remember what conversations that he had with which reporters. Libby is gambling. Libby will lose. Libby figured that if Oliver North used the "greymail strategy" in the '80's, why not use it now.
Here is today's article from truthout.org:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021806A.shtml
You know what this is really about, don't you?
And why certain files are classified for "now" for national "security"....
The reason is because a little country known as *Israel* committed treason.....
You see, it was Israel that was behind the outing of the CIA......
I will shut up now >8-)
Basically...they had soldier libby and their fellow neocon assyrians destroy an entire CIA operation....filled with american and other agents...and did much more then that, using british zionist israeli friends of theirs in several countries...... Queen Margaret Thatcher....
This is the end times....we're here prosecuting the end of times...
007
HARPER'S MAGAZINE Presents-
"Is There A Case For Impeachment?" A public forum featuring Lewis H. Lapham, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Michael Ratner, Elizabeth Holtzman, & John Dean. Moderator- Sam Seder.
Thursday March 2, 8:00PM- Town Hall, NY, NY
S-Q
Town Hall- 123 West 43rd Street NY, NY
Tickets- $10 available @ Town Hall box office or Ticketmaster. ticketmaster.com
S-Q
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/
capitalgames?bid=3&pid=61162
"e" thanks but it won't open and it says "FORBIDDEN"
S-Q
Here is someting interesting on Raw Story.
DoD staffer's notes from 9/11 - 2:40 PM. DoD staffer's meeting with Rummy on September 11, 2001. A meeting to link Hussein with Bin Laden?:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/66726692@N00/100545349/
http://www.thenation.com
try this anon
Fitz, you are now attracting the wackos. It's time everyone mellow out.
Resistance still growing, read this article.
U.S. Church Alliance Denounces Iraq War
News | 19 Februari 2006 | 21:03:27
By BRIAN MURPHY, AP Religion Writer
Sat Feb 18, 1:05 PM ET
PORTO ALEGRE, Brazil - A coalition of American churches sharply denounced the U.S.-led war in Iraq on Saturday, accusing Washington of "raining down terror" and apologizing to other nations for "the violence, degradation and poverty our nation has sown."
ADVERTISEMENT
The statement, issued at the largest gathering of Christian churches in nearly a decade, also warned the United States was pushing the world toward environmental catastrophe with a "culture of consumption" and its refusal to back international accords seeking to battle global warming.
"We lament with special anguish the war in Iraq, launched in deception and violating global norms of justice and human rights," said the statement from representatives of the 34 U.S. members of World Council of Churches. "We mourn all who have died or been injured in this war. We acknowledge with shame abuses carried out in our name."
The World Council of Churches includes more than 350 mainstream Protestant, Anglican and Orthodox churches; the Roman Catholic Church is not a member. The U.S. groups in the WCC include the Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the United Methodist Church, several Orthodox churches and Baptist denominations, among others.
The statement is part of widening religious pressure on the Bush administration, which still counts on the support of evangelical churches and other conservative denominations but is widely unpopular with liberal-minded Protestant congregations.
The Very Rev. Leonid Kishkovsky, the moderator for the U.S. group of WCC members, said the letter was backed by the leaders of the churches but was not cleared by lower-level bodies. He predicted friction within congregations about the tone of the message.
"There is much internal anguish and there is division," said Kishkovsky, ecumenical officer of the Orthodox Church of America. "I believe church leaders and communities are wrestling with the moral questions that this letter is addressing."
On Friday, the U.S. National Council of Churches — which includes many WCC members — released a letter appealing to Washington to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and saying reports of alleged torture violated "the fundamental Christian belief in the dignity of the human person."
The two-page statement from the WCC group came at the midpoint of a 10-day meeting of more than 4,000 religious leaders, scholars and activists discussing trends and goals for major Christian denominations for the coming decades. The WCC's last global assembly was in 1998 in Zimbabwe — just four months after al-Qaida staged twin bombings at U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
"Our country responded (to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks) by seeking to reclaim a privileged and secure place in the world, raining down terror on the truly vulnerable among our global neighbors ... entering into imperial projects that seek to dominate and control for the sake of national interests," said the statement. "Nations have been demonized and God has been enlisted in national agendas that are nothing short of idolatrous."
The Rev. Sharon Watkins, president of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), worried that some may interpret the statement as undermining U.S. troops in Iraq.
"We honor their courage and sense of duty, but ... we, as people of faith, have to say to our brothers and sisters, `We are so profoundly sorry,'" Watkins said.
The message also accused U.S. officials of ignoring warnings about climate change and treating the world's "finite resources as if they are private possessions." It went on to criticize U.S. domestic policies for refusing to confront racism and poverty.
"Hurricane Katrina revealed to the world those left behind in our own nation by the rupture of our social contract," said the statement.
The churches said they had "grown heavy with guilt" for not doing enough to speak out against the Iraq war and other issues. The statement asked forgiveness for a world that's "grown weary from the violence, degradation and poverty our nation has sown."
In this photo released by Agencia Brasil, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, speaks during the 9th Assembly by the World Council of Churches in Porto Alegre, Brazil, on Friday, Feb. 17, 2006. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva urged churches and religious leaders Friday to cooperate more closely to speed social and economic reforms in Latin America's largest nation. Speaking to a World Council of Churches gathering, Silva said churches have an 'irreplaceable role in the task of transforming Brazil,' whose economy has been growing but remains burdened by widespread poverty and limited public services in some regions. (AP Photo/Ricardo Stuckert-AGENCIA BRASIL/HO)
http://news.yahoo.com/
s/ap/20060218/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_churches_iraq;_
ylt=Av_qMFSnuFdZic49ebeVI6FvzwcF;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA
Let there be peace!
World War III or Bust: Implications of a US Attack on Iran
by Heather Wokusch
February 19, 2006
globalresearch.ca (Global Research Exclusive)
Email this article to a friend
Print this article
"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous... Having said that, all options are on the table." George W. Bush, February 2005
Witnessing the Bush administration’s drive for an attack on Iran is like being a passenger in a car with a raving drunk at the wheel. Reports of impending doom surfaced a year ago, but now it’s official: under orders from Vice President Cheney’s office, the Pentagon has developed “last resort” aerial-assault plans using long-distance B2 bombers and submarine-launched ballistic missiles with both conventional and nuclear weapons.
How ironic that the Pentagon proposes using nuclear weapons on the pretext of protecting the world from nuclear weapons. Ironic also that Iran has complied with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, allowing inspectors to “go anywhere and see anything,” yet those pushing for an attack, the USA and Israel, have not.
The nuclear threat from Iran is hardly urgent. As the Washington Post reported in August 2005, the latest consensus among U.S. intelligence agencies is that “Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years.” The Institute for Science and International Security estimated that while Iran could have a bomb by 2009 at the earliest, the US intelligence community assumed technical difficulties would cause “significantly delay.” The director of Middle East Studies at Brown University and a specialist in Middle Eastern energy economics both called the State Department’s claims of a proliferation threat from Iran’s Bushehr reactor “demonstrably false,” concluding that “the physical evidence for a nuclear weapons program in Iran simply does not exist.”
So there’s no urgency - just a bad case of déjà vu all over again. The Bush administration is recycling its hype over Hussein’s supposed WMD threat into rhetoric about Iran, but look where the charade got us last time: tens of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, a country teetering on civil war and increased global terrorism.
Yet the stakes in Iran are arguably much higher.
Consider that many in the US and Iran seek religious salvation through a Middle Eastern blowout. “End times” Christian fundamentalists believe a cataclysmic Armageddon will enable the Messiah to reappear and transport them to heaven, leaving behind Muslims and other non-believers to face plagues and violent death. Iran’s new Shia Islam president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, subscribes to a competing version of the messianic comeback, whereby the skies turn to flames and blood flows in a final showdown of good and evil. The Hidden Imam returns, bringing world peace by establishing Islam as the global religion.
Both the US and Iran have presidents who arguably see themselves as divinely chosen and who covet their own country’s apocalypse-seeking fundamentalist voters. And into this tinderbox Bush proposes bringing nuclear weapons.
As expected, the usual suspects press for a US attack on Iran. Neo-cons who brought us the “cakewalk” of Iraq want to bomb the country. There’s also Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, busy coordinating the action plan against Iran, who just released the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review calling for US forces to “operate around the globe” in an infinite “long war.” One can assume Rumsfeld wants to bomb a lot of countries.
And there’s Israel, keen that no other country in the region gains access to nuclear weapons. In late 2002, former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Iran should be targeted “the day after” Iraq was subdued, and Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the Likud Party, recently warned that if he wins the presidential race in March 2006, Israel will “do what we did in the past against Saddam’s reactor,” an obvious reference to the 1981 bombing of the Osirak nuclear facility in Iraq. It doesn’t help that Iran’s Ahmadinejad has called the Holocaust a myth and said that Israel should be "wiped off the map."
In the eyes of the Bush administration, however, Iran’s worst transgression has less to do with nuclear ambitions or anti-Semitism than with the petro-euro oil bourse Tehran is slated to open in March 2006. Iran’s plan to allow oil trading in euros threatens to break the dollar’s monopoly as the global reserve currency, and since the greenback is severely overvalued due to huge trade deficits, the move could be devastating for the US economy.
So we remain pedal to the metal with Bush for an attack on Iran.
But what if the US does go ahead and launch an assault in the coming months? The Pentagon has already identified 450 strategic targets, some of which are underground and would require the use of nuclear weapons to destroy. What happens then?
You can bet that Iran would retaliate. Tehran promised a “crushing response” to any US or Israeli attack, and while the country – ironically - doesn’t possess nuclear weapons to scare off attackers, it does have other options. Iran boasts ground forces estimated at 800,000 personnel, as well as long-range missiles that could hit Israel and possibly even Europe. In addition, much of the world’s oil supply is transported through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow stretch of ocean which Iran borders to the north. In 1997, Iran’s deputy foreign minister warned that the country might close off that shipping route if ever threatened, and it wouldn’t be difficult. Just a few missiles or gunboats could bring down vessels and block the Strait, thereby threatening the global oil supply and shooting energy prices into the stratosphere.
An attack on Iran would also inflame tensions in the Middle East, especially provoking the Shiite Muslim populations. Considering that Shiites largely run the governments of Iran and Iraq and are a potent force in Saudi Arabia, that doesn’t bode well for calm in the region. It would incite the Lebanese Hezbollah, an ally of Iran’s, potentially sparking increased global terrorism. A Shiite rebellion in Iraq would further endanger US troops and push the country deeper into civil war.
Attacking Iran could also tip the scales towards a new geopolitical balance, one in which the US finds itself shut out by Russia, China, Iran, Muslim countries and the many others Bush has managed to offend during his period in office. Just last month, Russia snubbed Washington by announcing it would go ahead and honor a $700 million contract to arm Iran with surface-to-air missiles, slated to guard Iran’s nuclear facilities. And after being burned when the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority invalidated Hussein-era oil deals, China has snapped up strategic energy contracts across the world, including in Latin America, Canada and Iran. It can be assumed that China will not sit idly by and watch Tehran fall to the Americans.
Russia and China have developed strong ties recently, both with each other and with Iran. Each possesses nuclear weapons, and arguably more threatening to the US, each holds large reserves of US dollars which can be dumped in favor of euros. Bush crosses them at his nation’s peril.
Yet another danger is that an attack on Iran could set off a global arms race - if the US flaunts the non-proliferation treaty and goes nuclear, there would be little incentive for other countries to abide by global disarmament agreements either. Besides, the Bush administration’s message to its enemies has been very clear: if you possess WMD you’re safe, and if you don’t, you’re fair game. Iraq had no nuclear weapons and was invaded, Iran doesn’t as well and risks attack, yet that other “Axis of Evil” country, North Korea, reportedly does have nuclear weapons and is left alone. It’s also hard to justify striking Iran over its allegedly developing a secret nuclear weapons program, when India and Pakistan (and presumably Israel) did the same thing and remain on good terms with Washington.
The most horrific impact of a US assault on Iran, of course, would be the potentially catastrophic number of casualties. The Oxford Research Group predicted that up to 10,000 people would die if the US bombed Iran’s nuclear sites with conventional weapons, and that an attack on the Bushehr nuclear reactor could send a radioactive cloud over the Gulf. If the US uses nuclear weapons, such as earth-penetrating “bunker buster” bombs, radioactive fallout would become even more disastrous.
Given what’s at stake, few allies, apart from Israel, can be expected to support a US attack on Iran. While Jacques Chirac has blustered about using his nukes defensively, it’s doubtful that France would join an unprovoked assault, and even loyal allies, such as the UK, prefer going through the UN Security Council.
Which means the wildcard is Turkey. The nation shares a border with Iran, and according to Noam Chomsky, is heavily supported by the domestic Israeli lobby in Washington, permitting 12% of the Israeli air and tank force to be stationed in its territory. Turkey’s crucial role in an attack on Iran explains why there’s been a spurt of high-level US visitors to Ankara lately, including Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, FBI Director Robert Mueller and CIA Director Porter Goss. In fact, the German newspaper Der Spiegel reported in December 2005 that Goss had told the Turkish government it would be “informed of any possible air strikes against Iran a few hours before they happened” and that Turkey had been given a "green light" to attack camps of the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in Iran “on the day in question.”
It’s intriguing that both Valerie Plame (the CIA agent whose identity was leaked to the media after her husband criticized the Bush administration’s pre-invasion intelligence on Iraq) and Sibel Edmonds (the former FBI translator who turned whistleblower) have been linked to exposing intelligence breaches relating to Turkey, including potential nuclear trafficking. And now both women are effectively silenced.
The US public sees the issue of Iran as backburner, and has little eagerness for an attack on Iran at this time. A USA Today/CNN Gallup Poll from early February 2006 found that a full 86% of respondents favored either taking no action or using economic/diplomatic efforts towards Iran for now. Significantly, 69% said they were concerned “that the U.S. will be too quick to use military force in an attempt to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.”
And that begs the question: how can the US public be convinced to enter a potentially ugly and protracted war in Iran?
A domestic terrorist attack would do the trick. Just consider how long Congress went back and forth over reauthorizing Bush’s Patriot Act, but how quickly opposing senators capitulated following last week’s nerve-agent scare in a Senate building. The scare turned out to be a false alarm, but the Patriot Act got the support it needed.
Now consider the fact that former CIA Officer Philip Giraldi has said the Pentagon’s plans to attack Iran were drawn up “to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States.” Writing in The American Conservative in August 2005, Giraldi added, “As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.”
Chew on that one a minute. The Pentagon’s plan should be used in response to a terrorist attack on the US, yet is not contingent upon Iran actually having been responsible. How outlandish is this scenario: another 9/11 hits the US, the administration says it has secret information implicating Iran, the US population demands retribution and bombs start dropping on Tehran.
That’s the worst-case scenario, but even the best case doesn’t look good. Let’s say the Bush administration chooses the UN Security Council over military power in dealing with Iran. That still leaves the proposed oil bourse, along with the economic fallout that will occur if OPEC countries snub the greenback in favor of petro-euros. At the very least, the dollar will drop and inflation could soar, so you’d think the administration would be busy tightening the nation’s collective belt. But no. The US trade deficit reached a record high of $725.8 billion in 2005, and Bush & Co.’s FY 2007 budget proposes increasing deficits by $192 billion over the next five years. The nation is hemorrhaging roughly $7 billion a month on military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and is expected to hit its debt ceiling of $8.184 trillion next month.
So the white-knuckle ride to war continues, with the administration’s goals in Iran very clear. Recklessly naïve and impetuous perhaps, but clear: stop the petro-euro oil bourse, take over Khuzestan Province (which borders Iraq and has 90% of Iran’s oil) and secure the Straits of Hormuz in the process. As US politician Newt Gingrich recently put it, Iranians cannot be trusted with nuclear technology, and they also "cannot be trusted with their oil."
But the Bush administration cannot be trusted with foreign policy. Its military adventurism has already proven disastrous across the globe. It’s incumbent upon each of us to do whatever we can to stop this race towards war.
Heather Wokusch is a free-lance writer working on a book for progressives. She can be contacted via her web site at: www.heatherwokusch.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
To become a Member of Global Research
The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text & title are not modified. The source must be acknowledged and an active URL hyperlink address to the original CRG article must be indicated. The author's copyright note must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com
www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.
To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at Global Research's News and Discussion Forum
For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Heather Wokusch, globalresearch.ca (Global Research Exclusive), 2006
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=WOK20060219&articleId=2002
My nexuses!!
Its presidents day and well, interestingly enough, my company now, does not offer this as a day off as in years past.. interesting huh, that we do not honor it ..
?any thing to do with the tone, arrogance, be damned you stupid American people we're going to screw you to the wall because we can -- of this Administration versus those past?
hmmmmmmmmmmmm. well it'll be just like any other day, Dr Evil, Mini-Me and the Ass contriving another major disaster {Iran} that we'll have to go and 'not do' nation building.
We need a little Merry Fitzmas .. right about now to stop the nonsense.
When Chalabi leaked the plans to invade Iran the Iranians stated that any attack on them will be met by the deployment of hundreds of thousands of ground troops to over run the U.S. forces in Iran. The Iranis are dedicated, and fierce fighters and nothing like the average Iraqi conscripts we came to see.
They aren't slouches when it comes to combat...
"Despite its overall weaknesses in relation to Israel and the US, Iran has an advanced air defense system, deployed to protect its nuclear sites; "they are dispersed and underground making potential air strikes difficult and without any guarantees of success." (Jerusalem Post, 20 April 2005). It has upgraded its Shahab-3 missile, which can reach targets in Israel. Iran's armed forces have recently conducted high-profile military exercises in anticipation of a US led attack. Iran also possesses some 12 X-55 strategic cruise missiles, produced by the Ukraine. Iran's air defense systems is said to feature Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as shoulder-launched SA-7 missiles (Jaffa Center for Strategic Studies)."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO505A.html
Correction:
"will be met by the deployment of hundreds of thousands of ground troops to over run the U.S. forces in IRAN."
IRAQ meant obviously.
Post a Comment
<< Home